What "credible" source- Fox News News. Read the news today. You think I'm making this shit up?

Party platforms are a lot of hooey. Now you are asking me to choose between supporting gay marriage (Democrats) or making abortion illegal (Republicans)? Neither of these extremes represents the way most people think.

The first step is to see if these views are in fact adopted as official statements. Since neither convention has been held, nither platform has been approved.

The next step is to see what individual candidates say about it. Laws are passed in Congress and signed by the President. They are not made by party hacks looking for more votes.

I guarantee the President is in favor of gay marriage, as he has said so publicly within the last few months. I guarantee Romney is NOT in favor of outlawing abortion. Check his statements. Being personally opposed to something is much, much different from seeking to change the law. Example: Romney does not drink or smoke. Do you really think he would seek to make those illegal activities? A Constitutional amendment? Get real. A super majority of Congress and of the states is required to amend the Constitution. There is no way in the world that would happen.

Save the panic and name calling for later after the firestorm of the conventions has settled.

You know; the right wingers tout they are against abortion yet they have no problem sending our troops into wars that we haven't paid for. Some of them like Ryan say they are gun loving catholics. Meaning guns and religion go hand and hand. What kind of crazy talk is that? Just goes to show you that the Republican Party has been infiltrated by the crazies of the Tea Party far right and this country's voters Republican and Democratic alike better wake up and smell the roses before it's too late to smell the roses. The Republican circus next week is going to be like going to the sucker alley at a big state fair exhibition.

You're spinning that completely out of context. You know what Ryan was referencing, don't you? Obama's statement about non-leftist Americans "clinging to guns and religion". Look it up if you really missed that.

greymule, I think you'll have to agree the article from Huff-Post is quite vague on the important points, and it wasn't even a slow news day. In light of the Todd Akins incident I can't believe they need a "filler".
If the GOP is involved in a war against women, how did they wind up with so many outstanding women in their ranks?
I, personally don't believe in abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or threat to the mother's life. However, since I don't expect to be pregnant, my personal feeling really has nowhere to go. I recuse myself.

Danilo - I agree with rape, incest, threat to the mothers life also. Otherwise I would not feel good letting the individual enjoy life and sex and think I am going to pay for an abortion.

Sarge

Before everyone gets their panties in a wad over a non-issue read below (if you don't know the process for a Constitutional amendment). If anyone wants to go to the source simply read Article V of the Constitution. And answer the question at the end.

Old legal saying (as best as I remember that is), "One can indict a ham sandwich, but the process will throw it out before the bread goes stale".

************ History Class in On ***********
Article V of the Constitution spells out the processes by which amendments can be proposed and ratified.

To Propose Amendments

In the U.S. Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate approve by a two-thirds supermajority vote, a joint resolution amending the Constitution. Amendments so approved do not require the signature of the President of the United States and are sent directly to the states for ratification.

Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. (This method has never been used.)

To Ratify Amendments

Three-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, or

Ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. This method has been used only once -- to ratify the 21st Amendment -- repealing Prohibition.

The Supreme Court has stated that ratification must be within "some reasonable time after the proposal." Beginning with the 18th amendment, it has been customary for Congress to set a definite period for ratification. In the case of the 18th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd amendments, the period set was 7 years, but there has been no determination as to just how long a "reasonable time" might extend.

Of the thousands of proposals that have been made to amend the Constitution, only 33 obtained the necessary two-thirds vote in Congress. Of those 33, only 27 amendments (including the Bill of Rights) have been ratified.

************** History Class Off *****************

Question: Now how many truly believes that any such aforementioned amendment would make it to the floor of the House or Senate?

I don't give a rat's rear what a politician thinks. Everyone has the right to an opinion whether its a stupid opinion or a brilliant opinion; but it will never, let me repeat never make it to the floor of either sides of the Congress, much less gain ratification. The issue is, at best, a specious statement and argument. Move along citizen, nothing to see here.

Before everyone gets their panties in a wad over a non-issue read below (if you don't know the process for a Constitutional amendment). If anyone wants to go to the source simply read Article V of the Constitution. And answer the question at the end.

Old legal saying (as best as I remember that is), "One can indict a ham sandwich, but the process will throw it out before the bread goes stale".

************ History Class in On ***********
Article V of the Constitution spells out the processes by which amendments can be proposed and ratified.

To Propose Amendments

In the U.S. Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate approve by a two-thirds supermajority vote, a joint resolution amending the Constitution. Amendments so approved do not require the signature of the President of the United States and are sent directly to the states for ratification.

Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. (This method has never been used.)

To Ratify Amendments

Three-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, or

Ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. This method has been used only once -- to ratify the 21st Amendment -- repealing Prohibition.

The Supreme Court has stated that ratification must be within "some reasonable time after the proposal." Beginning with the 18th amendment, it has been customary for Congress to set a definite period for ratification. In the case of the 18th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd amendments, the period set was 7 years, but there has been no determination as to just how long a "reasonable time" might extend.

Of the thousands of proposals that have been made to amend the Constitution, only 33 obtained the necessary two-thirds vote in Congress. Of those 33, only 27 amendments (including the Bill of Rights) have been ratified.

************** History Class Off *****************

Question: Now how many truly believes that any such aforementioned amendment would make it to the floor of the House or Senate?

I don't give a rat's rear what a politician thinks. Everyone has the right to an opinion whether its a stupid opinion or a brilliant opinion; but it will never, let me repeat never make it to the floor of either sides of the Congress, much less gain ratification. The issue is, at best, a specious statement and argument. Move along citizen, nothing to see here.